Bicyclist assaults NYPD officer

[Smackety]

The massholes are the people driving cars, right?

 

[Dan O.]

I thought they were the ones using mass transport and leaving a hole in the otherwise gridlocked traffic.

 

[davefoc]

The cop was indicted:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/1215200...dicted_in_times_square_bike_assaul_144344.htm

 

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I almost feel sorry for the cop. All the hard work he put into becoming a police officer and his career is over before it ever began. Three weeks on the force!

As despicable and contemptible as his behavior as a police officer was, this case shouldn't be dragged out for so long. It's 2009 and he's only just been indicted? For (as disgusting as it was) a simple case of assault where no one was seriously hurt?

In a fair and just world, the book on this case would have been closed long ago by instantly dismissing everything against the bicyclist and sending Mr. Pogan to jail for a week and then returning him to the force with a very big warning.

 

[HarryKeogh]

I almost feel sorry for the cop. All the hard work he put into becoming a police officer and his career is over before it ever began. Three weeks on the force!

As despicable and contemptible as his behavior as a police officer was, this case shouldn't be dragged out for so long. It's 2009 and he's only just been indicted? For (as disgusting as it was) a simple case of assault where no one was seriously hurt?

In a fair and just world, the book on this case would have been closed long ago by instantly dismissing everything against the bicyclist and sending Mr. Pogan to jail for a week and then returning him to the force with a very big warning.

I disagree. There has to be a bigger deterrent to viciously assaulting someone than spending a mere week in jail.

Though I doubt it will happen I think this man, after conviction, should be kicked off the force. He showed the type of behavior he was capable of three weeks into the job. He has no business being a cop.

 

[Ian Osborne]

I disagree. There has to be a bigger deterrent to viciously assaulting someone than spending a mere week in jail.

Though I doubt it will happen I think this man, after conviction, should be kicked off the force. He showed the type of behavior he was capable of three weeks into the job. He has no business being a cop.

Seconded. And remember, he also lied on a police report about the incident. If I committed two serious criminal offenses while doing my job, I'd be dismissed. So should he.

And apart from anything else, if he stays, every time he appears in court the defense will throw this incident back in his face. 'You lied then. How can we believe you now?' He'd be no use to the police whatsoever.

 

[davefoc]

My feelings were similar to EeneyMinnieMoe's but my thoughts were more along the lines of HarryKeogh's Ian Osborne's.

I did think that EeneyMinnieMoe's comment about this taking too long to come to an indictment was right. I don't understand why this couldn't have been in front of a grand jury within a month. That would seem to have allowed plenty of time for case preparation, pre-indictment negotiation, getting it scheduled, etc. Why did this take five months to get done? My guess is that this case has a political twist with the disgusting police union trying to defend their guy and the politicians maneuvering to figure out how best to exploit the event without being damaged by it.

Somewhat sadly, given all the time this guy had invested in becoming a policemen, it is overall in almost everybody's best interest that this man never be allowed to be a policemen again. His value as a police witness would be very low as any defence attorney could easily impeach whatever he said based on his previous actions. And of course the significant possibility that he would assault other people in his role as a policeman should rule out his return to active police duty.

My only question is whether the fact that he was a policeman on a lawful assignment should be used as a mitigating factor in his sentencing. I think it should. He was placed in the situation where something like this might happen as a result of his job and for me that argues for some mitigation of the eventual sentence. But he is guilty of filing a false police report and assault and he should be receive a felony conviction for both of those crimes.

ETA: I wonder how this might have gone if his victim was permanently disabled as a result of the policeman's assault?

 

[Ian Osborne]

My only question is whether the fact that he was a policeman on a lawful assignment should be used as a mitigating factor in his sentencing. I think it should.

Why? If he'd crossed the line while making a difficult and necessary arrest, or policing a riot while assorted neanderthals threw bricks at him, sure. But there was absolutely no need for what happened that day at all. No crime was being committed, no one was in any danger and there was no 'heat of the moment'. He seemed to be motivated by boredom, and picked a cyclist at random to pick on. If anything, being entrusted with upholding the law should be an aggravating factor for a crime like that.

 

[davefoc]

Why? If he'd crossed the line while making a difficult and necessary arrest, or policing a riot while assorted neanderthals threw bricks at him, sure. But there was absolutely no need for what happened that day at all. No crime was being committed, no one was in any danger and there was no 'heat of the moment'. He seemed to be motivated by boredom, and picked a cyclist at random to pick on. If anything, being entrusted with upholding the law should be an aggravating factor for a crime like that.

Generally my sense of it is that somebody who commits a crime under color of authority should even be punished more harshly than normal. These are people who seek to undermine the very fabric of our society by the use of special advantages that their position have given them.

In this case, I'd split the difference with you. The filing of a false police report was a very significant crime IMHO and was done totally for a self serving purpose. The police officer used his position of authority to give the false report more credibility and to make it less likely that the lie would be discovered. If his testimony had been believed, it is likely that a completely innocent citizen would have been convicted of a crime. So throw the book at him on that one.

In the case of the assault, he acted brutally and irresponsibly. But his motivation stems more from his nature and perhaps his athletic experience and not from a goal of personal benefit. It was in the course of doing his job that he came to make this mistake. I see that as mitigating. Convict the SOB, but let's not throw the book at him over this one.

And lastly, the police officer has already suffered substantially more than most citizens would as the result of a similar assault. As an engineer I spent a lot of time and effort preparing for a career. If I had assaulted somebody just after I got out of college it probably would not have ended any hope of pursuing a career as an engineer. This officer's actions have essentially caused the nullification of a great deal of effort on his part to establish a career as a policeman. I think that is somewhat mitigating also.

 

[Ian Osborne]

As an engineer I spent a lot of time and effort preparing for a career. If I had assaulted somebody just after I got out of college it probably would not have ended any hope of pursuing a career as an engineer.

That's because your crime would've had no bearing on your career as an engineer. What if you'd cut corners while building a footbridge and then falsified test results to cover it up? I'll wager you wouldn't have kept your licence then (I believe engineers are licensed?).

 

[davefoc]

That's because your crime would've had no bearing on your career as an engineer. What if you'd cut corners while building a footbridge and then falsified test results to cover it up? I'll wager you wouldn't have kept your license then (I believe engineers are licensed?).

In the US electrical engineers (what I was) tend not to be licensed although there is some stuff like professional engineer or something that it seems like it might be available. I think civil and structural engineers might tend to be licensed, although I'm not familiar with anything about that.

As to your point:
I think it goes to intent. I rarely, but occasionally, worked on wall powered devices where somebody could get killed if I had made a mistake. If it could be shown that I had made a decision driven by personal benefit and with reckless disregard for the safety of others I would be guilty of a significant crime and reasonably enough I would probably have significant difficulty reestablishing a career as an engineer.

The distinction that I saw between that and the bicyclist assault is that the personal benefit to the officer stemming from the assault wasn't clear cut. It is arguable that he acted instinctively without sufficient thought about the consequences of his action. I'd cut him some slack because of that. I still think that the incident should disqualify him from ever working as a police officer again, but given the degree of punishment that already encompasses I would tend to be a little less harsh in the sentencing.

As I've already stated, IMHO the filing of the false police report was an egregious act for which the personal benefit was absolutely clear and for which no claim of instinctive sudden behavior was credible. And for which significant unjustified damage to another individual was likely . I would like to see him punished to the highest possible degree within the law for that and I see his position as a police officer as an aggravating rather than mitigating factor with regard to the false police report.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I'm not sure I'd classify it asa Vicious Assault. Now if he'd whacked the guy with a baton a few times... but that assault was less vicious than some things you see in a schoolyard.

 

[davefoc]

I'm not sure I'd classify it asa Vicious Assault. Now if he'd whacked the guy with a baton a few times... but that assault was less vicious than some things you see in a schoolyard.

I disagree with this, but it is interesting to see the range of reaction to the video. I saw the assault as much more serious than many attacks that have been filmed where police officers strike a subject with their clubs. Those attacks might produce some significant trauma but the injury is largely constrained by the intent of the police officers involved.

In this case, the assault easily could have resulted in the permanent injury or death of the victim. In addition, the attack did not seem to be precipitated by any action of the victim, another element that made the assault particularly egregious in my mind.

 

[CORed]

Perhaps you missed the part where I said the cop is a jerk?Cyclists are required to follow the same laws as cars. If they don't the are subject to arrest. I've seen these "critical mass " protest rides. They can really f things up in Manhattan. What the cop did was wrong and I never said otherwise. Just because the cops tackled the cyclist doesn't not automatically make the cyclist completely innocent. Can you tell me , before the video started, exactly what took place? No? Maybe the cyclist hit someone, maybe not you don't know. Maybe you should wait and get all the facts. As much as I would like the cop to be wrong, I will cut him some slack before I accuse him like you have.



You have no idea how far off base you are on this. Once again you have jumped to a huge untrue assumption. You do that a lot. If you would read instead of just react you wouldn't look so stupid.

Please keep a civil tone in accordance with the Membership agreement. Thank you.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady

Well, if the cyclist did something illegal off camera, before the video started, tackling the cyclist could have been a justifiable means of making an arrest. However, the cop accused the cyclist of deliberately hitting him, which was clearly a lie. This cop should be fired for making a false report, even if there was some valid reason to arrest the cyclist.

 

[Bell]

Did the cop really step up to the guy to tackle him off his bicycle? Another possibility could be that the cop was making his way over to the curb, when he spotted the cyclist coming towards him. Both he and the cyclist then tried to avoid each other, resulting in them ending up on the same spot, collision ensured.

I'm curious for a statement from the cops laywer.

 

[zooterkin]

Did the cop really step up to the guy to tackle him off his bicycle? Another possibility could be that the cop was making his way over to the curb, when he spotted the cyclist coming towards him. Both he and the cyclist then tried to avoid each other, resulting in them ending up on the same spot, collision ensured.

I'm curious for a statement from the cops laywer.

I'm curious; have you watched the video?

 

[Bell]

I'm curious; have you watched the video?

Yes, I have. For what I can make out from the crappy resolution is two cops standing in the middle of the road, with all the cyclist passing by. Next the two cops start walking towards the curb, when Long comes driving down the road directly towards where Pogan is walking. They spot each other and both then start to move to the left, after which the incident occurs. But from the low resolution I can't tell if Pogan put out his arm in a reflex from walking into Long, or as a way to tackle Long to the ground.

 

[zooterkin]

Yes, I have. For what I can make out from the crappy resolution is two cops standing in the middle of the road, with all the cyclist passing by. Next the two cops start walking towards the curb, when Long comes driving down the road directly towards where Pogan is walking. They spot each other and both then start to move to the left, after which the incident occurs. But from the low resolution I can't tell if Pogan put out his arm in a reflex from walking into Long, or as a way to tackle Long to the ground.

Well, from watching the policeman's legs, and the extra stride he seems to take rather than stopping and letting the bike go past, and the angle of his leg as he closes, he is accelerating towards the bike, and it seems clear to me that he deliberately charged the cyclist. It is also clear that, regardless of his intent, he lied about what happened in his report.

ETA: It's also quite clear that Pogan didn't just stick an arm out in reflex, he gathers himself and launches upwards at the cyclist. I'm wondering if you're somehow watching a different video from me.

 

[Bell]

Well, from watching the policeman's legs, and the extra stride he seems to take rather than stopping and letting the bike go past, and the angle of his leg as he closes, he is accelerating towards the bike, and it seems clear to me that he deliberately charged the cyclist. It is also clear that, regardless of his intent, he lied about what happened in his report.

It all happened very quick. I can imagine the cop walking across the street and then spots the cyclist coming directly at him, he accelerates to get out of the cyclist's way. If the cyclist had the exact same thought and tried to stear out of the cops way, they'll end up in the same spot.

That's why I never step out of the way when I notice someone running or cycling straight at me. But I had to learn it the hard way

If it was just an accident, then I can understand the cop stating that Long drove right into him (from his POV). But I'm not defending the cop, since I was not there and the video alone doesn't clearly show what happend, only that it happend. I only try to see if the incident could be something else than police brutality. That is also why I am curious for a statement by Pogan's laywer.

 

[TX50]

That's ridiculous. This wasn't any innocent collision. The two cops appear
to spot and track the cyclist even before he enters the shot. The cop then
moves over to intercept and deliberately knocks him off the bike. There
surely can't be any serious question about that!